MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410778781 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.70025

Improved order selection method for hidden Markov models: A case study with movement data

2025· article· en· W4410778781 on OpenAlexafffund
Fanny Dupont, Marianne Marcoux, Nigel E. Hussey, Marie Auger‐Méthé

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceHidden Markov modelModel selectionMovement (music)Markov modelArtificial intelligenceMarkov chainMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hidden Markov models (HMMs) are a versatile statistical framework commonly used in ecology to characterize behavioural patterns from animal movement data. In HMMs, the observed data depend on a finite number of underlying hidden states, generally interpreted as the animal's unobserved behaviour. The number of states is a crucial hyperparameter, controlling the trade‐off between the ecological interpretability of behaviours (fewer states) and the goodness of fit of the model (more states). Selecting the number of states, commonly referred to as order selection, is notoriously challenging. Common model selection metrics, such as Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC), often perform poorly in determining the number of states, particularly when models are misspecified. Building on existing methods for HMMs and mixture models, we propose a double penalised maximum likelihood estimate (DPMLE) for the simultaneous estimation of the number of states and parameters of non‐stationary HMMs. The DPMLE differs from traditional information criteria by using two penalty functions on the stationary probabilities and state‐dependent parameters. For non‐stationary HMMs, forward and backward probabilities are used to approximate stationary probabilities. Using a simulation study that includes scenarios with additional complexity in the data, we compare the performance of our method with that of AIC and BIC. We also illustrate how the DPMLE differs from AIC and BIC using narwhal ( Monodon monoceros ) movement data. The proposed method outperformed AIC and BIC in identifying the correct number of states under model misspecification. Furthermore, its capacity to handle non‐stationary dynamics allowed for more realistic modelling of complex movement data, offering deeper insights into narwhal behaviour. Our method is a powerful tool for order selection in non‐stationary HMMs, with potential applications extending beyond the field of ecology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.348 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207